Datasets:

witcheer
/

rtx-5090-benchmarks

	# Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat — the prior tune's two regressions, healed

	Model: [Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat-MTP-GGUF](https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat-MTP-GGUF) — a "compatibility" re-release of [Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder](https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-MTP-GGUF) (a coder SFT of the Qwen3.6-27B lineage). The release notes claim less looping across harnesses and better thinking stability, and advise running temp 0.85–1.0.

	We benched the original Coder two weeks ago and found two regressions against its own base, Qwen3.6-27B: a degraded MTP draft head (1.4–1.6× where the base head does 1.8–2.2×) and real SWE-bench resolve below base (17/30 vs 19/30). So the question for this release is narrow and answerable: did the compat work fix the regressions, and at what cost to capability?

	Same harness as the base and the prior Coder. Q6_K, think-off, temperature 0 — we hold temp at the board value so the only variable is the model. (The vendor recommends 0.85–1.0; temp 0 is the maximally-adversarial low-temp harness their notes warn about, which makes it the right place to test a "less looping" claim head-to-head against the prior version.)

	---

	## Leg 1 — Quality: flat

	\| \| MMLU \| ARC-C \| HellaSwag \| HumanEval \| GSM8K \| q_avg \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 87.86 \| 96.67 \| 95.30 \| 90.85 \| 97.80 \| 93.70 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 87.5 \| 96.8 \| 95.2 \| 93.3 \| 97.5 \| 94.1 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| — \| — \| — \| — \| — \| 94.0 \|

	Flat — 93.70 against the prior 94.1 and base 94.0, inside the 50%-sample swing. HumanEval is the only axis that moves (90.85 / 149-of-164 vs the prior 93.3), and not enough to read through the noise. A harness-compat release shouldn't move the weights, and it doesn't. The interesting axes are the two it was supposed to fix.

	## Leg 2 — MTP draft head: recovered to base

	Self-speculative decode, draft-depth 2, q8 KV — the same protocol as our base and prior-Coder numbers. "base" here is the Compat model with drafting off.

	\| workload \| base tok/s \| +MTP tok/s \| Compat × \| prior Coder × \| base Qwen head × \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Q&A \| 62.7 \| 122.1 \| 1.9× \| 1.4× \| 1.9× \|
	\| code \| 62.7 \| 124.5 \| 2.0× \| 1.4× \| 2.0× \|
	\| prose \| 62.8 \| 127.0 \| 2.0× \| 1.4× \| 1.8× \|
	\| JSON \| 62.7 \| 142.7 \| 2.3× \| 1.6× \| 2.2× \|
	\| repetitive \| 62.6 \| 144.0 \| 2.3× \| 1.6× \| 2.2× \|

	This is the clearest result. The prior Coder's "natively finetuned" draft head accepted worse than the model it was built on — flat at 1.4–1.6× where the base head climbs 1.8→2.2× with output predictability. Compat's head is back on the base curve: 1.9–2.3×, peaking near 144 tok/s. Whatever the compat work touched, it went past chat-template plumbing and restored the draft head's acceptance. The "100 tps" the line claims clears comfortably. (Absolute baseline is 62.7 tok/s here vs ~70 in the June-12 run — a llama.cpp build shift, b9653; the speedup ratio is the protocol-comparable number, and that's what recovered.)

	## Leg 3 — Agentic Score: 100.0, and saturated

	\| \| Agentic Score \| tool-eff \| stable \| tok/task \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 100.0 \| 1.00 \| 100% \| 196 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 100.0 \| 1.00 \| 100% \| 195 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| 98.6 \| 1.00 \| — \| — \|

	Perfect score, zero instability across the suite — and the codeact and multistep axes run thinking-on, so the "thinking stability" claim holds where we can see it. But this axis is saturated: it can't tell Compat from the prior version, both sit at 100.0. On our [agentic leaderboard](https://huggingface.co/datasets/witcheer/agentic-score-leaderboard) this is the recurring "blind-within-family" problem — the synthetic score ranks across the zoo but not between siblings of one base. The real discriminator is the next leg.

	## Leg 4 — Real SWE-bench: recovered to base parity

	Same 12 SWE-bench Verified bugs, real repo tools in Docker, graded by the official harness. Base and prior were re-graded on the identical 12 from their cached generations, so all three are one protocol.

	\| \| synthetic agentic \| real SWE-12 resolve \| give-ups (empty patch) \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 100.0 \| 8/12 (67%) \| 3 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| 98.6 \| 8/12 (67%) \| 3 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 100.0 \| 7/12 (58%) \| 4 \|

	Compat resolves the same eight bugs as base, exactly. The prior Coder missed one of them — `pytest-dev__pytest-6202` — and gave up (empty patch) one more time than base. Compat recovers that bug and lands on base's resolved set with one fewer give-up. The three none of them solve (`seaborn-3187`, `requests-1921`, `sphinx-8621`) are stable across all three; Compat also patched `pylint-7080` but the patch failed its tests.

	On the full 30-bug set the prior Coder scored 17/30 (57%) against base's 19/30 (63%); the 12-subset reproduces that gap (7/12 vs 8/12) and shows Compat closing it. The +1 is within noise on n=12 — so the honest read is recovered to base parity, beat the prior tune, not "now better than base."

	---

	## Verdict

	A compatibility release that does exactly what it says, measured. The prior Qwopus-Coder carried two regressions against its own base — a broken draft head and below-base real-bug resolve. Compat heals both back to base parity and keeps quality and synthetic-agentic flat. No capability traded for the fix.

	Worth it if you wanted the Coder tune's agentic profile but were paying the draft-head tax — the speed penalty is gone and real bug-fixing is back to base. Not a reason to switch off the base Qwen3.6-27B for bug-fixing alone: on these 12 bugs they resolve the identical set. The win is that the coder tune no longer costs you anything to run.

	---

	RTX 5090 32GB · llama.cpp b9653 · Q6_K · think-off · temp 0 · 50% quality sample. Quality + speed via `run_treatment.sh`; MTP via `scripts/bench_mtp_workload.sh` (draft-depth 2, q8 KV); agentic via `gate_and_run.sh`; SWE-bench via `lib/agentic/native/run_swebench.py` on the 12-bug subset, graded by the official `swebench` harness. Base and prior Coder re-graded on the identical 12 from cached generations.

	# Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat — the prior tune's two regressions, healed

	Model: [Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat-MTP-GGUF](https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-Compat-MTP-GGUF) — a "compatibility" re-release of [Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder](https://huggingface.co/Jackrong/Qwopus3.6-27B-Coder-MTP-GGUF) (a coder SFT of the Qwen3.6-27B lineage). The release notes claim less looping across harnesses and better thinking stability, and advise running temp 0.85–1.0.

	We benched the original Coder two weeks ago and found two regressions against its own base, Qwen3.6-27B: a degraded MTP draft head (1.4–1.6× where the base head does 1.8–2.2×) and real SWE-bench resolve below base (17/30 vs 19/30). So the question for this release is narrow and answerable: did the compat work fix the regressions, and at what cost to capability?

	Same harness as the base and the prior Coder. Q6_K, think-off, temperature 0 — we hold temp at the board value so the only variable is the model. (The vendor recommends 0.85–1.0; temp 0 is the maximally-adversarial low-temp harness their notes warn about, which makes it the right place to test a "less looping" claim head-to-head against the prior version.)

	---

	## Leg 1 — Quality: flat

	\| \| MMLU \| ARC-C \| HellaSwag \| HumanEval \| GSM8K \| q_avg \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 87.86 \| 96.67 \| 95.30 \| 90.85 \| 97.80 \| 93.70 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 87.5 \| 96.8 \| 95.2 \| 93.3 \| 97.5 \| 94.1 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| — \| — \| — \| — \| — \| 94.0 \|

	Flat — 93.70 against the prior 94.1 and base 94.0, inside the 50%-sample swing. HumanEval is the only axis that moves (90.85 / 149-of-164 vs the prior 93.3), and not enough to read through the noise. A harness-compat release shouldn't move the weights, and it doesn't. The interesting axes are the two it was supposed to fix.

	## Leg 2 — MTP draft head: recovered to base

	Self-speculative decode, draft-depth 2, q8 KV — the same protocol as our base and prior-Coder numbers. "base" here is the Compat model with drafting off.

	\| workload \| base tok/s \| +MTP tok/s \| Compat × \| prior Coder × \| base Qwen head × \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Q&A \| 62.7 \| 122.1 \| 1.9× \| 1.4× \| 1.9× \|
	\| code \| 62.7 \| 124.5 \| 2.0× \| 1.4× \| 2.0× \|
	\| prose \| 62.8 \| 127.0 \| 2.0× \| 1.4× \| 1.8× \|
	\| JSON \| 62.7 \| 142.7 \| 2.3× \| 1.6× \| 2.2× \|
	\| repetitive \| 62.6 \| 144.0 \| 2.3× \| 1.6× \| 2.2× \|

	This is the clearest result. The prior Coder's "natively finetuned" draft head accepted worse than the model it was built on — flat at 1.4–1.6× where the base head climbs 1.8→2.2× with output predictability. Compat's head is back on the base curve: 1.9–2.3×, peaking near 144 tok/s. Whatever the compat work touched, it went past chat-template plumbing and restored the draft head's acceptance. The "100 tps" the line claims clears comfortably. (Absolute baseline is 62.7 tok/s here vs ~70 in the June-12 run — a llama.cpp build shift, b9653; the speedup ratio is the protocol-comparable number, and that's what recovered.)

	## Leg 3 — Agentic Score: 100.0, and saturated

	\| \| Agentic Score \| tool-eff \| stable \| tok/task \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 100.0 \| 1.00 \| 100% \| 196 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 100.0 \| 1.00 \| 100% \| 195 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| 98.6 \| 1.00 \| — \| — \|

	Perfect score, zero instability across the suite — and the codeact and multistep axes run thinking-on, so the "thinking stability" claim holds where we can see it. But this axis is saturated: it can't tell Compat from the prior version, both sit at 100.0. On our [agentic leaderboard](https://huggingface.co/datasets/witcheer/agentic-score-leaderboard) this is the recurring "blind-within-family" problem — the synthetic score ranks across the zoo but not between siblings of one base. The real discriminator is the next leg.

	## Leg 4 — Real SWE-bench: recovered to base parity

	Same 12 SWE-bench Verified bugs, real repo tools in Docker, graded by the official harness. Base and prior were re-graded on the identical 12 from their cached generations, so all three are one protocol.

	\| \| synthetic agentic \| real SWE-12 resolve \| give-ups (empty patch) \|
	\|---\|---:\|---:\|---:\|
	\| Coder-Compat \| 100.0 \| 8/12 (67%) \| 3 \|
	\| Qwen3.6-27B (base) \| 98.6 \| 8/12 (67%) \| 3 \|
	\| Qwopus-Coder (prior) \| 100.0 \| 7/12 (58%) \| 4 \|

	Compat resolves the same eight bugs as base, exactly. The prior Coder missed one of them — `pytest-dev__pytest-6202` — and gave up (empty patch) one more time than base. Compat recovers that bug and lands on base's resolved set with one fewer give-up. The three none of them solve (`seaborn-3187`, `requests-1921`, `sphinx-8621`) are stable across all three; Compat also patched `pylint-7080` but the patch failed its tests.

	On the full 30-bug set the prior Coder scored 17/30 (57%) against base's 19/30 (63%); the 12-subset reproduces that gap (7/12 vs 8/12) and shows Compat closing it. The +1 is within noise on n=12 — so the honest read is recovered to base parity, beat the prior tune, not "now better than base."

	---

	## Verdict

	A compatibility release that does exactly what it says, measured. The prior Qwopus-Coder carried two regressions against its own base — a broken draft head and below-base real-bug resolve. Compat heals both back to base parity and keeps quality and synthetic-agentic flat. No capability traded for the fix.

	Worth it if you wanted the Coder tune's agentic profile but were paying the draft-head tax — the speed penalty is gone and real bug-fixing is back to base. Not a reason to switch off the base Qwen3.6-27B for bug-fixing alone: on these 12 bugs they resolve the identical set. The win is that the coder tune no longer costs you anything to run.

	---

	RTX 5090 32GB · llama.cpp b9653 · Q6_K · think-off · temp 0 · 50% quality sample. Quality + speed via `run_treatment.sh`; MTP via `scripts/bench_mtp_workload.sh` (draft-depth 2, q8 KV); agentic via `gate_and_run.sh`; SWE-bench via `lib/agentic/native/run_swebench.py` on the 12-bug subset, graded by the official `swebench` harness. Base and prior Coder re-graded on the identical 12 from cached generations.